Wrong.
The Celtics are not as popular as the Lakers. However, the Celtics are defintely a national team with a following around the country, that is 2nd to the Lakers and superior to the Knicks.

When the Knicks are in Boston, there are no Knick fans.
When the Celtics are at MSG, they invade MSG moreso than any other Boston team.
Compare a Celtic game at MSG to a Bruin game at MSG, and you will see the difference is astonishing on how many more Celtic fans are here.

The Celtics regularly invade places like MSG, New Jersey, Philly, Washington, the sunbelt, and the west coast.
The Knicks?
Not like the Celtics, and only this year have the begun to have a real road presence, and frankly, it's not any better than when the Rangers are in Tampa/Florida.

My point?
1) The Knicks do not travel better than the Rangers, and if we had 2 superstars (or 2 of the top 15 players) we would easily outdraw the Knicks on the road.

2) The Celtics have the second best NBA fanbase and dominate the road like no other fanbase outside the Lakers do.

Well you just kind of proved my point.

If the Knicks have so many bandwagon fans, why aren't those arenas invaded by Knick fans?

The Celtics are popular but I don't think they have a bandwagon fan base. Those Celtic fans you see at MSG for ex. Are transplant Bostonians.
You see tons of Red Sox fans at YS too.

Which leads me to another question. I really don't understand how Yankee fans just seemingly give their tickets away to Sox fans. But Sox fans don't give many of their tickets away to Yankee fans. You know this because you hardly see Yankee fans at Fenway. Meanwhile half of YS is red during these series.

The same for Knick fans. I understand there are a lot of people from Boston in New York but it shouldn't be that easy for Celtic fans to grab Knick tickets.
And I know here are many New Yorkers living in Boston but can't get a ticket to a Knick/Celtic game up there. Very odd.

The order of NY teams and their popularity would probably be something like this

Yankees>Giants>Knicks>Mets>Jets>Rangers

I personally don't ever see the Rangers becoming a bigger deal than the Knicks in NYC (or any other Hockey team, anywhere else in America) until we get more Black and Hispanic players in the NHL.

The biggest reason Hockey's fanbase is kind of locked in terms of growth, is that it's still considered a "white man's game". Get a couple non-Canadian, black players (who are good/great) on the Rangers and I guarantee you that things will slowly start to change.

The order of NY teams and their popularity would probably be something like this

Yankees>Giants>Knicks>Mets>Jets>Rangers

I personally don't ever see the Rangers becoming a bigger deal than the Knicks in NYC (or any other Hockey team, anywhere else in America) until we get more Black and Hispanic players in the NHL.

The biggest reason Hockey's fanbase is kind of locked in terms of growth, is that it's still considered a "white man's game". Get a couple non-Canadian, black players (who are good/great) on the Rangers and I guarantee you that things will slowly start to change.

LOL, seriously, the Jets are behind the Knicks, METS, and Giants? No doubt the Yankees are #1, but the Jets past couple of seasons, along with the collapses by the Giants and Mets, and how mediocre and terrible the Knicks have been, you can't tell me the Jets are in that order.

They are the 2nd most popular team in NY right now.

Also, don't give me the Giants have won a Super Bowl a couple years ago, people don't remember that as much as the failures the past couple of teams have had.

The order of NY teams and their popularity would probably be something like this

Yankees>Giants>Knicks>Mets>Jets>Rangers

I personally don't ever see the Rangers becoming a bigger deal than the Knicks in NYC (or any other Hockey team, anywhere else in America) until we get more Black and Hispanic players in the NHL.

The biggest reason Hockey's fanbase is kind of locked in terms of growth, is that it's still considered a "white man's game". Get a couple non-Canadian, black players (who are good/great) on the Rangers and I guarantee you that things will slowly start to change.

Even before their recent success, I'd put the Jets ahead of the Mets for sure. Probably ahead of the Knicks, too. Though I haven't lived in NY for over a decade, so what do I know?

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrjimmyg89

They are the 2nd most popular team in NY right now.

Also, don't give me the Giants have won a Super Bowl a couple years ago, people don't remember that as much as the failures the past couple of teams have had.

That may be true, but only at this moment in time. NYC is and pretty much always will be predominantly Giants territory. If both teams are on equal ground, there's more support for Blue than Green. I'm a huge Jets fans, but that's the current reality.

That may be true, but only at this moment in time. NYC is and pretty much always will be predominantly Giants territory. If both teams are on equal ground, there's more support for Blue than Green. I'm a huge Jets fans, but that's the current reality.

Oh I know that the Giants have more of a fanbase, but it is changing. It's hard to get people interested in a team that was consistently bad while the Giants of the 80's were the toast of the town (outside of the '86 Mets). That's why this generation of fans in their early 30's and later 20's are Giant fans.

the Jets will get a stronger base of NY once they can get a Lombardi Trophy, and they are closer then the Giants are IMO. These past 2 seasons with Rex at the helm should only be the beginning of swaying NY to the Jets.

To piggy back off my a large part of basketball being popular because fans want to root for the star player etc...

Case in point: The Lakers are far far far far more popular than the Celtics. Am I right?
I mean I don't see nearly, hardly any Celtic fans in the opposing teams arena. Unless it's an arena close to Boston. MSG for ex. but even MSG isn't littered with Celtic fans the way it's littered with Laker fans whenever it's Lakers/Knicks.
When the Lakers are on the road like in Memphis, Texas, Minnesota, Charlotte, New Orleans. Their fans literally take over the building. Can't say the same about the Celtics.

Now why do the Lakers have seemingly so many more fans than the Celtics? Both franchises have won recently and have just about the same number of championships.Could it be that they have the most popular player in the sport if not one of the top three best?
On the other hand the Celtics don't. Allen is great but he's not Kobe, Pierce is very good but he's not Lebron. Garnett is great but he's not Wade.

My my point? Many NBA fans tend to root for players. So it may seem that teams have bandwagon fans. When in actuality they're rooting for a specific player.If Kobe was traded right now to the T'wolves, they would become popular not because they have great jersey's or they play in a nice city, it would be because of Kobe Bryant. You would have many "fans" buying number 8 T'wolves jersey's.

I know the Knicks will have a bandwagon fans when the Staples Center, Memphis, Oklahoma City, Houston, Chicago, is filled with Knick fans.
But I don't expect that because while the Knicks have 2 top 15 players, they don't have the most popular player on their team.

Agreed was saying the same about baseball. A lot of bandwagon fans and casual fans that gravitate to big names and I have no problem with that. Those are guys performing at the best in the league, they're a marvel to watch in any sport whether it's a Pujols, Jeter, Doc hal, Kobe, Lebron. The sports for whatver reason to me don't seem to generate a high percentage of die hards like football and hockey do. But they do geta lot of fans period because of the nature of the game and higher likelihood of Sportscenter highlight plays I guess. Hockey you don't see as many individual beast plays anymore. People have a harder time appreciating a team game/team accomplishemnt I guess. Easier to hang onto Blake griffins dunks than Thorntons passing ability y'know?

ALso Jets are definitely more popular than the mets and knicks right now.

The problem as I see it with Hockey coverage on wfan is that I believe that most Hosts wish the sport would just disappear. Because they don't look at Hockey as entertainment.They look at Hockey as WORK. The Cancer started with Fatcessa and the Maddog. They got away with not talking hockey. Look, most of these guy's go home and watch the Knick game and could DVR the Rangers, but that's more work for them. I've E-mailed the fan and told them how I felt. I even sarcastically suggested that maybe they could at least watch Ranger's in 60 because it's not as much Work.It's bull if they say there aren't any callers. I know your in phone limbo if you call with a Hockey question or thought. Those screeners are told not to put the calls through when they know they didn't do their homework. Take Benningo for example. When he was hungry and doing the overnights, he would talk Hockey a lot. Not now. His partner Evan couldn't tell you what a hockey puck is. I really feel that they can't wait for the season to be over. Then there are the Host's that just don't know the sport and don't want to embarrass themselves.

Just hopping into this thread to say that last night I heard a loud "let's go Rangers" chant coming from the crowd as we were walking out of The Beacon Theatre after The Allman Brothers Band finished...

Just hopping into this thread to say that last night I heard a loud "let's go Rangers" chant coming from the crowd as we were walking out of The Beacon Theatre after The Allman Brothers Band finished...

There is no way the Jets are more popular than the Giants.
It's not even close.
The Jets DO GET MORE headlines than the Giants, and they make more noise than the Giants, but that's the way that organization functions.
This is not accidental.
The Giants have always been the classy, quiet organization which has owned New York football. It would be unlike them and unnecessary to flaunt and act out like the Jets do with Rex Ryan.

Notice, the Giants never talk about taking over New York and they never flaunt about being the team in town. This is because they don't need to.
The Jets have classic little brother syndrome, they are insecure as an organization and constantly feel that inferior complex need to make as much noise as possible to get attention.

The Jets aren't more popular, they just get more attention because they create more attention because they feel if they don't the market will ignore them.
The Giants are solidy set as NY's football team due to them being here first (since 1926), being one of the most successful franchises (7 titles with 3 super bowls), and having a very loyal base.

The Jets sales of PSL's were much lower than the Giants despite cheaper prices. In part this is why the Jets have a loudmouth coach and why they signed a bunch of loudmouth big name free agents...to sell seats.

The Jets antics is something they do out of neccesity, which the Giants don't.

Don't confuse louthmouth soundbites with popularity.
The Giants are easily number 1 and will remain that way for the long haul due to history and tradition. The Jets base is on Long Island. Everywhere else they are the minority.

Oh, and the Giants haven't choked. They have 1 less win the last two years than the Jets, and if you think the Jets are Super Bowl primed, you're wrong.
They've got an old team, with many free agents. They have trashed talked into having a bulls-eye, and nobody in recent history has made it to the Conference Championship in three straight seasons.
If you ask me, the Jets chances were these last two years because it's tempting the odds to suggest they will make it back to the conference title game again.
They missed their shot at the Super Bowl, nobody gets three straight cracks in this NFL anymore.

The Giants haven't choked? You mean being 6-2 and finishing out of the playoffs isn't choking? Blowing a 28 point lead in a span of 15 minutes of gametime isn't choking? When one of the team that was supposed to contend for the NFC East comes out flat and you only have to get past the Eagles isn't choking? Losing the biggest game of the season in the 1st quarter isn't choking? Trust me, I've seen teams choke it away, being a Mets fan, and that is choking at its finest.

And nobody in the modern NFL gets a shot at the Superbowl more then twice? Pittsburgh and New England say hello. Indy has been pretty good at getting to the AFC Championship too. I guess Philly going to 5 straight NFC championships means nothing either, but you don't get these kinds of shots. Oh, and we did it with a rookie QB and a 2nd yr QB. Imagine if he didn't have turn over issues at some point during the season, which the Giants had the WHOLE year with what is now a veteran QB.

The Jets are also soooo old. Guess our offense with Sanchez, Greene, 2 of Edwards, Cotchery, and Holmes, Keller, D'Brick, Mangold, Slausen, are all so old. And on defense with Revis, Cromartie, Leonhard, Harris, Pace, Wilson, and Scott should just retire they are so old. They do have an older D-line outside of Puoha who has turned into a nice player, but all teams have veterans that are near the end at some point, whether or not they spent their whole career on the team (Ellis) or signed with them (Taylor, T-Rich, LT) and you replace them smartly and build up other young players around them.

Sounds like to me you are the one with the inferiority complex cause you can't stand the Jets are a better team then the Giants and have a better coach leading them where they are going, which is, you guessed it, to a Superbowl. You're just going to have to deal with the Jets being here, cause they aren't going anywhere anytime soon.

There is no way the Jets are more popular than the Giants.
It's not even close.
The Jets DO GET MORE headlines than the Giants, and they make more noise than the Giants, but that's the way that organization functions.
This is not accidental.
The Giants have always been the classy, quiet organization which has owned New York football. It would be unlike them and unnecessary to flaunt and act out like the Jets do with Rex Ryan.

Notice, the Giants never talk about taking over New York and they never flaunt about being the team in town. This is because they don't need to.
The Jets have classic little brother syndrome, they are insecure as an organization and constantly feel that inferior complex need to make as much noise as possible to get attention.

The Jets aren't more popular, they just get more attention because they create more attention because they feel if they don't the market will ignore them.
The Giants are solidy set as NY's football team due to them being here first (since 1926), being one of the most successful franchises (7 titles with 3 super bowls), and having a very loyal base.

The Jets sales of PSL's were much lower than the Giants despite cheaper prices. In part this is why the Jets have a loudmouth coach and why they signed a bunch of loudmouth big name free agents...to sell seats.

The Jets antics is something they do out of neccesity, which the Giants don't.

Don't confuse louthmouth soundbites with popularity.
The Giants are easily number 1 and will remain that way for the long haul due to history and tradition. The Jets base is on Long Island. Everywhere else they are the minority.

Oh, and the Giants haven't choked. They have 1 less win the last two years than the Jets, and if you think the Jets are Super Bowl primed, you're wrong.
They've got an old team, with many free agents. They have trashed talked into having a bulls-eye, and nobody in recent history has made it to the Conference Championship in three straight seasons.
If you ask me, the Jets chances were these last two years because it's tempting the odds to suggest they will make it back to the conference title game again.
They missed their shot at the Super Bowl, nobody gets three straight cracks in this NFL anymore.

Big time misconception the Jets are not old. The Eagles did it less than a decade ago and the bills less than a decade before them...seems every decade there's a team that hangs right there and just doesn't knock the door down...of course it would end up being the g***amn Jets. Still the Jets have a lot going for them, some elite D talent (namely Revis) a top 5 O line (better if they shore up the LG/RT but Brick, Mangold and Moore are three all stars). Great young TE, a so far good young QB who's been great in the PO's. Great WR.

Ironically they need better D. Bart Scott was ahorrible singing. Maybe he brought swagger but for 7 mil he's a dime a dozen. Money was better spent elsewhere. The combined failure of Jenks and Gholston kept that team from a super bowl. The boost a 6th overall should have provided and/or an all pro stalwart DT...remember how Pitt just gutted the Jets that first drive with the run? Doesn't happen if those two had lived up to the billing/money. You upgrade the D line you win the super bowl last year. Pouha and De vito (Sione especially) were fantastic and played solid but the other two were suppossed to bring a dominating presence and an actual pass rush.

LOL, seriously, the Jets are behind the Knicks, METS, and Giants? No doubt the Yankees are #1, but the Jets past couple of seasons, along with the collapses by the Giants and Mets, and how mediocre and terrible the Knicks have been, you can't tell me the Jets are in that order.

They are the 2nd most popular team in NY right now.

Also, don't give me the Giants have won a Super Bowl a couple years ago, people don't remember that as much as the failures the past couple of teams have had.

This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read. The Giants always have been and always will be more popular than the Jets and it is not even close. Going to take more than 2 Championship game appearances to change that.

The order of NY teams and their popularity would probably be something like this

Yankees>Giants>Knicks>Mets>Jets>Rangers

I personally don't ever see the Rangers becoming a bigger deal than the Knicks in NYC (or any other Hockey team, anywhere else in America) until we get more Black and Hispanic players in the NHL.

The biggest reason Hockey's fanbase is kind of locked in terms of growth, is that it's still considered a "white man's game". Get a couple non-Canadian, black players (who are good/great) on the Rangers and I guarantee you that things will slowly start to change.

LOL yeah okay.. U obviously are from jersey ( i am too but i actually know sports) there are more jets fans first of all then giants. the mets have no fans ( i love the mets tho) teh rangers have been selling out 99% of their games since ever. EVEN WHEN THEY WERE TERRIBLE .

LOL yeah okay.. U obviously are from jersey ( i am too but i actually know sports) there are more jets fans first of all then giants. the mets have no fans ( i love the mets tho) teh rangers have been selling out 99% of their games since ever. EVEN WHEN THEY WERE TERRIBLE .

The Mets have tons of fans, most of them are just in hiding because of how bad the team has been. The Giants have always had the bigger fanbase out of the two football teams. Giants have Jersey locked down while the Jets have Long Island but there's more Giant fans in the city than Jet fans.

The football and baseball teams will always be more popular than the rest of the teams in this city.

LOL yeah okay.. U obviously are from jersey ( i am too but i actually know sports) there are more jets fans first of all then giants. the mets have no fans ( i love the mets tho) teh rangers have been selling out 99% of their games since ever. EVEN WHEN THEY WERE TERRIBLE .

try

yanks>Jets>Giants>Rangs=knicks>mets

Not even close on the Jets-Giants or the Knicks-Rangers. I hate the Knicks, but they have far more fans than the Rangers. The Mets have more fans than both.